But we are listening and incrementally improving the experience based on what users are telling us.
Yea, you lost me right there. It's not an "experience" - it's a tool. When you call it an experience, we know you're using it just like others:
The "experience" is why Digg changed their site and lost most of their users (to Reddit AND slashdot)
The "experience" is why Yahoo changed their Groups and refused to change it back and took 6 months to give their users an emphatic "no", even though most of them had already left.
The "experience" is the reason HTC refuses to provide Android updates for last year's model phones, or even fix any of the bugs because they're embedded in the firmware.
The "experience" is the excuse HP, Asus, and Lenovo use for loading gigabytes of resource-sucking crapware and nagware on their consumer computers.
I could go on with this list extensively, but know that your audience understands this kind of marketspeak and translate it immediately into "We follow this policy that we know you will hate because we think it will improve our revenue." Review the results of the examples above and you will see how poorly this typically works out.
At this point, yes you are wrong. The whole point of the Police for is not to protect and serve but to take in enough money to stay alive. If you look at a police department and look at the "crimes" people are arrested and fined for you will see that the vast majority are revenue collection under the guise of breaking a law and nothing more.
You sir, are an idiot.
Police do not get to keep the money they collect. None of that money is allowed to go back to the police department.
Sorry, but you are wrong, especially to assert that "none" of that money goes back to the police department. It's different state-by-state and by jurisdiction, of course, but you'll find that most fines from local tickets go directly to that jurisdiction. For a small town, it could be a significant amount of the municipality's revenue, and of course, the more revenue they have the more they can budget for the police department.
There actually are some jurisdictions where the police department gets a percentage of each fine, and even more have something like a "public safety fund" (controlled by the police department) that gets some amount from each fine. Direct revenue from fines is probably rare, but there are jurisdictions that do that.
And, of course, the worst abuse happens with "asset forfeiture", which allows the police to retain a significant portion of all the assets (including cash) that they confiscate, regardless of whether any charges are even filed against the original property owner. This policy was actually put in place to encourage police, who were becoming skeptical of the US "drug war", to continue to participate.
yes, she has a Bachelor of Science, just not in STEM, and she has work experience but not in programming.
So that would be quite a risk for anyone to hire her to do any coding - gender and age has nothing to do with it. You have to start either with internships or be able to show some successes in open source projects. And you still have to be willing to start out making less than you do working in whatever field you currently have experience in.
You must be exaggerating, since GW-BASIC required you to manually type in line numbers, just like on an Apple II. Eclipse may be bloated and sluggish, but at least you don't need to type in line numbers.
Now go figure out where they put the "turn on line numbers" function in Eclipse this quarter...
As far as I know streaking is still technically legal, but... you just don't see that many streakers any more. I attribute this to the devastating social consequences of the sex offender registry.
That is bad. I thought you had to do something illegal to get put on the registry.
The hurdles are real. If you are not doing what society approves of for your gender/race/age/etc then you will face more problems than if you are conforming to society's expectations.
And where do you get this notion that "society" does not "approve" of women in STEM fields? I don't see any evidence of that, just the opposite. Yes, there are disproportionally more men in those fields, but "society" seems to be wringing their hands in distress about it, not smiling and nodding.
Just as a demonstration, I Googled "women in STEM" and "men in STEM". The "women" search yielded a LOT more results (284K v. 201K for men), and 9 out of 10 of the "men" results turned out to be articles pointing out the gender gap and asking for solutions.
Frankly, what we need is a concerted effort to get more people educated in STEM and at least given interesting opportunities to learn more about science and tech in general, and stop trying to always "dumb it down" for the populace, and less focus on gender and racial differences.
apparently meteorologists have just discovered the term Polar Vortex
No, meteorologists have understood the term Polar Vortex for decades. Weathermen, newscasters, and ratings-minded producers have only just discovered the term.
It gives the MSM a way to explain extreme cold that can be attributed to Global Warming.
Surely no justice system in a democratic country penalises people for doing so.
Oh, I don't know about that. There is the example of the high schooler prosecuted for drug distribution after saving a fellow student from a potentially deadly asthma attack. That was a prescription inhaler she used.
He is debating Steyn in court about whether he is a fraud. If Steyn can just prove he is a fraud, he wins, if not, he is in a lot of trouble.
It's part of a concerted effort to end free speech of anyone that wants to question the AGW alarmists. It includes Reddit's decision to ban comments on climate change, targeting not just libellous or hateful stuff, but “outspoken opinions”, “potentially controversial” views, and “contrarianism”. In short, critical or eccentric thinking, stuff that doesn’t fit with what the overlords of Reddit consider to be politically proper.
They've encouraged other news sources to follow suit, and the LA Times has stated that they do not publish anything from skeptics of climate change, but they haven't yet gone so far as to ban them from the on-line comments section.
That one of the supposedly most free-speechy sections of the World Wide Web can be so upfront in demanding the “positive censorship” of controversial viewpoints is shocking. It shows just how successfully beyond the pale criticism of climate change alarmism has been put, and how even the young, funky overseers of modern, open discussion forums are willing to rein in free speech if they see or hear something that offends their Greenish sensibilities.
I hope Steyn makes this case a major media showcase. He should subpoena every single document and email and witness that has even a remote possibility to of demonstrating even the appearance of impropriety on Mann's part (that should be an easy task). Maybe he can even get UVA to finally release the Mann documents that were denied exposure through numerous FOIA requests and lawsuits by the Virginia Attorney General's office.
Transparency and free speech are at stake. We should be willing to tolerate all manner of inconveniences to ensure openness in science and uncensored debate.
Actually, you'll find that a lot of people breaking the law don't know it, and that ignorance is no excuse.
That's a general idea in law, but it's not some universally applicable rule. See, for instance Lambert v. California which ruled explicitly that you can't be convicted of a law when there is no reasonable expectation that you knew about it. There are so many laws on the books now, from federal, and state, and local, that no citizen can possibly be expected to know them all. In fact in IRS tax law, you have to be pretty blatantly lying to be charged with tax fraud, because people can't be held criminally liable for understanding all of the filing rules. The Supreme Court established that years ago.
In US v. Wilson, Judge Posner wrote:
We want people to familiarize themselves with the laws bearing on their activities. But a reasonable opportunity doesn’t mean being able to go to the local law library and read Title 18. It would be preposterous to suppose that someone from Wilson’s milieu is able to take advantage of such an opportunity. If none of the conditions that make it reasonable to dispense with proof of knowledge of the law is present, then to intone “ignorance of the law is no defense” is to condone a violation of fundamental principles for the sake of a modest economy in the administration of criminal justice.
Really, you think slaves were much safer than their inner-city descendants?
Sorry to have to slap you in the face with reality, but yes they were. Over 8,000 blacks are killed (mostly by other blacks) every year, based on 2005 statistics. That's 1/2 of all victims of homicide, even though they are only 13% of the population. By contrast, there were only an estimated 2, 800 slaves killed during the entire century from 1750 to 1850, or about 280 per year. The horrors of the slave trade in Africa, where 50% of slaves died, and shipping and trading slaves, which often only 40 - 50% survived, not withstanding, the fact is that being a slave in a southern plantation of the US is MUCH safer than being an African-American living in American cities today.
Sorry you don't like this fact. But you seem to prefer safety to the current situation. So, you support slavery. It's your position. Own it.
I'm pointing out that "Freedom is more important than safety" is not true
Execept you can't, because it's not. Your assertion about prison isn't an exception - it bears out the rule. You see, your freedom isn't affected - it's not you being put in prison.
But, if you really think safety is more important, then you can certainly get a cell there fairly easily. You will be safe, clothed, housed, and fed the rest of your life. So, you should go to prison.
You want still to claim that the chinese destroyed most of their temples in 1960, or before?
You're creating strawmen, saying I made claims I never made. The Chinese destroyed a LOT of cultural history during the Cultural Revolution, they have official religions (currently), and they killed millions for practicing outlawed religions. You've been wrong about every single point you made and you can't even admit it.
I get a lot of history from books, pretty sure you've either never read one, or your reading comprehension is a total failure.
You posted a list of Chinese temples earlier - go back to that list and find ONE that did not suffer damage from the Cultural Revolution. Just one.
Your claim that "practial all their temples" (once) got destroyed simply is wrong.
That was not my claim.
LOL, who cares if it is 85% or 90%, obviously you do... perhaps it is only 75%... does not matter either.
This is you not admitting you were wrong, but instead dismissing it as "does not matter" because you were wrong and cannot admit it. You're obstinate in your ignorance. It ain't 75% either - go read that study and the references.
I really wonder what your "practiced destruction of all" religions and places of worship actually is supposed to mean when in fact China actually has 5 "recognized" or "official" religions. They are Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, and Protestantism covers a huge deal of the world population. So did they destroy practicaly all Temples/Churches of "Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, and Protestantism" or not?
You're a fucking idiot, you know that, right? The Cultural Revolution took place in the 1960's and 1970's under Mao. Then things changed in the 1980's. Timeline, idiot. Past vs. Present.
Damn, no wonder we're in such trouble, people like you that don't even get that "history" took place in the "past". Idiot.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't seem to understand that the main value of Slashdot is (or rather was, from a long time ago) the comment section
Whoa, wait, hold on a second there. There are things on Slashdot other than the comment section?? That's news to me.
But we are listening and incrementally improving the experience based on what users are telling us.
Yea, you lost me right there. It's not an "experience" - it's a tool. When you call it an experience, we know you're using it just like others:
I could go on with this list extensively, but know that your audience understands this kind of marketspeak and translate it immediately into "We follow this policy that we know you will hate because we think it will improve our revenue." Review the results of the examples above and you will see how poorly this typically works out.
I may not have a 4 digit id, but I have a 5 digit one. Please listen to the voices of experience here.
Shush, you.
How about putting in your 4-digit experience goodness? Are you the voice of reason, or just old-and-in-the-way?
At this point, yes you are wrong. The whole point of the Police for is not to protect and serve but to take in enough money to stay alive. If you look at a police department and look at the "crimes" people are arrested and fined for you will see that the vast majority are revenue collection under the guise of breaking a law and nothing more.
You sir, are an idiot.
Police do not get to keep the money they collect. None of that money is allowed to go back to the police department.
Sorry, but you are wrong, especially to assert that "none" of that money goes back to the police department. It's different state-by-state and by jurisdiction, of course, but you'll find that most fines from local tickets go directly to that jurisdiction. For a small town, it could be a significant amount of the municipality's revenue, and of course, the more revenue they have the more they can budget for the police department.
There actually are some jurisdictions where the police department gets a percentage of each fine, and even more have something like a "public safety fund" (controlled by the police department) that gets some amount from each fine. Direct revenue from fines is probably rare, but there are jurisdictions that do that.
And, of course, the worst abuse happens with "asset forfeiture", which allows the police to retain a significant portion of all the assets (including cash) that they confiscate, regardless of whether any charges are even filed against the original property owner. This policy was actually put in place to encourage police, who were becoming skeptical of the US "drug war", to continue to participate.
yes, she has a Bachelor of Science, just not in STEM, and she has work experience but not in programming.
So that would be quite a risk for anyone to hire her to do any coding - gender and age has nothing to do with it. You have to start either with internships or be able to show some successes in open source projects. And you still have to be willing to start out making less than you do working in whatever field you currently have experience in.
It's not "open source" that I'm looking to get them interested in...
... you insensitive clod!
You must be exaggerating, since GW-BASIC required you to manually type in line numbers, just like on an Apple II. Eclipse may be bloated and sluggish, but at least you don't need to type in line numbers.
Now go figure out where they put the "turn on line numbers" function in Eclipse this quarter...
As far as I know streaking is still technically legal, but ... you just don't see that many streakers any more. I attribute this to the devastating social consequences of the sex offender registry.
That is bad. I thought you had to do something illegal to get put on the registry.
The hurdles are real. If you are not doing what society approves of for your gender/race/age/etc then you will face more problems than if you are conforming to society's expectations.
And where do you get this notion that "society" does not "approve" of women in STEM fields? I don't see any evidence of that, just the opposite. Yes, there are disproportionally more men in those fields, but "society" seems to be wringing their hands in distress about it, not smiling and nodding.
Just as a demonstration, I Googled "women in STEM" and "men in STEM". The "women" search yielded a LOT more results (284K v. 201K for men), and 9 out of 10 of the "men" results turned out to be articles pointing out the gender gap and asking for solutions.
Frankly, what we need is a concerted effort to get more people educated in STEM and at least given interesting opportunities to learn more about science and tech in general, and stop trying to always "dumb it down" for the populace, and less focus on gender and racial differences.
No, meteorologists have understood the term Polar Vortex for decades. Weathermen, newscasters, and ratings-minded producers have only just discovered the term.
It gives the MSM a way to explain extreme cold that can be attributed to Global Warming.
provided it continues to live up to expectations.
What do you mean "continues"?
Surely no justice system in a democratic country penalises people for doing so.
Oh, I don't know about that. There is the example of the high schooler prosecuted for drug distribution after saving a fellow student from a potentially deadly asthma attack. That was a prescription inhaler she used.
and you were Holder and Obama, what sort of deal would you try to strike with everybody's favorite secrets-leaker?"
Well I'm not an elitist tyrant like those guys, so there's no way I would do anything similar, were I in the same position.
...a familiar lifestyle for people from third-world countries with high crime, corrupt cops and crumbling infrastructure.
Add "required to live and work there", and you have created the US version of the 21st-century ghetto. Congratulations.
There are certain places in the world that if you go you should be setting off alarm bells.
Colorado seems to be at the top of the list these days.
He is debating Steyn in court about whether he is a fraud. If Steyn can just prove he is a fraud, he wins, if not, he is in a lot of trouble.
It's part of a concerted effort to end free speech of anyone that wants to question the AGW alarmists. It includes Reddit's decision to ban comments on climate change, targeting not just libellous or hateful stuff, but “outspoken opinions”, “potentially controversial” views, and “contrarianism”. In short, critical or eccentric thinking, stuff that doesn’t fit with what the overlords of Reddit consider to be politically proper.
They've encouraged other news sources to follow suit, and the LA Times has stated that they do not publish anything from skeptics of climate change, but they haven't yet gone so far as to ban them from the on-line comments section.
That one of the supposedly most free-speechy sections of the World Wide Web can be so upfront in demanding the “positive censorship” of controversial viewpoints is shocking. It shows just how successfully beyond the pale criticism of climate change alarmism has been put, and how even the young, funky overseers of modern, open discussion forums are willing to rein in free speech if they see or hear something that offends their Greenish sensibilities.
I hope Steyn makes this case a major media showcase. He should subpoena every single document and email and witness that has even a remote possibility to of demonstrating even the appearance of impropriety on Mann's part (that should be an easy task). Maybe he can even get UVA to finally release the Mann documents that were denied exposure through numerous FOIA requests and lawsuits by the Virginia Attorney General's office.
Transparency and free speech are at stake. We should be willing to tolerate all manner of inconveniences to ensure openness in science and uncensored debate.
Actually, you'll find that a lot of people breaking the law don't know it, and that ignorance is no excuse.
That's a general idea in law, but it's not some universally applicable rule. See, for instance Lambert v. California which ruled explicitly that you can't be convicted of a law when there is no reasonable expectation that you knew about it. There are so many laws on the books now, from federal, and state, and local, that no citizen can possibly be expected to know them all. In fact in IRS tax law, you have to be pretty blatantly lying to be charged with tax fraud, because people can't be held criminally liable for understanding all of the filing rules. The Supreme Court established that years ago.
In US v. Wilson, Judge Posner wrote:
Your period key seems to be broken.
Really, you think slaves were much safer than their inner-city descendants?
Sorry to have to slap you in the face with reality, but yes they were. Over 8,000 blacks are killed (mostly by other blacks) every year, based on 2005 statistics. That's 1/2 of all victims of homicide, even though they are only 13% of the population. By contrast, there were only an estimated 2, 800 slaves killed during the entire century from 1750 to 1850, or about 280 per year. The horrors of the slave trade in Africa, where 50% of slaves died, and shipping and trading slaves, which often only 40 - 50% survived, not withstanding, the fact is that being a slave in a southern plantation of the US is MUCH safer than being an African-American living in American cities today.
Sorry you don't like this fact. But you seem to prefer safety to the current situation. So, you support slavery. It's your position. Own it.
So... you support slavery? Because slaves were much safer than their inner-city descendants are today. So you think slavery was better, apparently.
Liberty or Death, mofo, Liberty or Death.
I'm pointing out that "Freedom is more important than safety" is not true
Execept you can't, because it's not. Your assertion about prison isn't an exception - it bears out the rule. You see, your freedom isn't affected - it's not you being put in prison.
But, if you really think safety is more important, then you can certainly get a cell there fairly easily. You will be safe, clothed, housed, and fed the rest of your life. So, you should go to prison.
You want still to claim that the chinese destroyed most of their temples in 1960, or before?
You're creating strawmen, saying I made claims I never made. The Chinese destroyed a LOT of cultural history during the Cultural Revolution, they have official religions (currently), and they killed millions for practicing outlawed religions. You've been wrong about every single point you made and you can't even admit it.
I get a lot of history from books, pretty sure you've either never read one, or your reading comprehension is a total failure.
You posted a list of Chinese temples earlier - go back to that list and find ONE that did not suffer damage from the Cultural Revolution. Just one.
Your claim that "practial all their temples" (once) got destroyed simply is wrong.
That was not my claim.
LOL, who cares if it is 85% or 90%, obviously you do ... perhaps it is only 75% ... does not matter either.
This is you not admitting you were wrong, but instead dismissing it as "does not matter" because you were wrong and cannot admit it. You're obstinate in your ignorance. It ain't 75% either - go read that study and the references.
I really wonder what your "practiced destruction of all" religions and places of worship actually is supposed to mean when in fact China actually has 5 "recognized" or "official" religions. They are Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, and Protestantism covers a huge deal of the world population. So did they destroy practicaly all Temples/Churches of "Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Catholicism, and Protestantism" or not?
You're a fucking idiot, you know that, right? The Cultural Revolution took place in the 1960's and 1970's under Mao. Then things changed in the 1980's. Timeline, idiot. Past vs. Present.
Damn, no wonder we're in such trouble, people like you that don't even get that "history" took place in the "past". Idiot.